4.4 Article

Inactivation of Salmonella enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium, and Salmonella Senftenberg by ultrasonic waves under pressure

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
Volume 63, Issue 4, Pages 451-456

Publisher

INT ASSOC MILK FOOD ENVIRONMENTAL SANITARIANS, INC
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-63.4.451

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The resistance of Salmonella Enteritidis (ATCC 13076), Salmonella Typhimurium (ATCC 13311), and Salmonella Senftenberg 775W (ATCC 43845) to ultrasonic waves under pressure treatments, at sublethal (manosonication) and lethal temperatures (manothermosonication) in citrate-phosphate buffer and in liquid whole egg was investigated. The influence of treatment parameters on the inactivation rate of manosonication was also studied. Decimal reduction times (D-t) of Salmonella Enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium, and Salmonella Senftenberg 775W corresponding to a heat treatment at 60 degrees C in pH 7 buffer and in liquid whole egg were 0.068, 0.12, and 1.0 min for buffer, and 0.12, 0.20, and 5.5 min for liquid whole egg. Those corresponding to a manosonication treatment (117 microns, 200 kPa, 40 degrees C) in both media were 0.73, 0.78, and 0.84 min, and 0.76, 0.84, and 1.4 min, respectively. When the amplitude of ultrasonic waves was increased linearly, the inactivation rate of manosonication increased exponentially. The inactivation rate also increased when pressure was raised. However, the magnitude of this increase was progressively smaller at higher pressures. The magnitude of the influence of the amplitude of ultrasonic waves and static pressure on the inactivation rate of manosonication was the same in the three serotypes investigated. Whereas a heat treatment at 60 degrees C only attained a 1/2-log cycle reduction in the number of Salmonella Senftenberg 775W survivors, a manothermosonication treatment (117 microns and 200 kPa) at this temperature attained a 3-log cycle reduction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available